nwnfandomcom-20200213-history
Talk:Discipline
Pen and Paper Since I made significant changes, I thought I should give some explanations here. #I de-hyphenated "pen-and-paper" to match the article of that name. #I object to calling discipline "necessary". It is hardly necessary if there are immunity items (e.g. dragon slippers) or skill-boosting items (e.g. epic gloves of discipline) available. If someone has a word a bit weaker than "necessary", I might be ok with that. #One of the arguments that was nominally a counter, may in fact be a supporter: "Fighters can do well in pen-and-paper investing entirely in cross-class skills." If those skills are not implemented in NWN, then this just strengthens the point being made (and I'm not sure which skills 72.154.194.205 had in mind). #The argument "The restriction that discipline's necessity places on fighter-types' choice of skills is a balancing factor." goes further than anything I've heard argued. This is saying that fighters would be too powerful if it weren't for discipline draining skill points. #The statement "Moreover, fighters and paladins already have the lowest number of skill points of all classes without a further restriction," appears to be completely misleading. (My uncertainly stems from not knowing what this "further restriction" is.) Half the classes (5 of the 11 base classes and 6 of the 11 prestige classes) get 2 + Int modifier skill points, the same as fighters and paladins. #Isn't the statement "This skill places an additional, time-consuming burden on module designers..." blatantly false? Balancing discipline is not time-consuming, nor is there a requirement that a module designer do so. Or has my limited experience led me to erroneous conclusions? 72.154.194.205 at one time had an example of a commoner with knockdown. Is that what is meant by a burden? That a module designer should not go around giving non-combatants combat feats? Also, what more is there to balancing than adjusting skill levels, feats, hit dice, ability scores, etc.? Are "skill levels" and "feats" not "factors that are already integral parts of both pen-and-paper and NWN sets of rules"? #The statement "A fighter-type that does not max out discipline becomes extremely vulnerable against opposing combatants even several levels lower, a problem that does not exist in pen-and-paper." is overly specific -- the same can be said of any class, not just fighters (except for possibly the "not existing in PnP" part). #The statement "This cannot be said for other classes and other skills." is also false. As noted, the class of the PC involved is irrelevant. Furthermore, a spellcaster who does not invest in concentration becomes extremely vulnerable to spell interruption. There are also some other skills that protect all classes. A character who does not invest in search becomes extremely vulnerable to traps. A chararacter who does not invest in spot and listen becomes extremely vulnerable to stealthy attacks. I think that covers all the changes I made. --The Krit 16:05, 26 June 2006 (PDT) Controversy *Uhh so what does PnP really have to do with NWN which is a CRPG loosely based on DnD rules without having to follow them 100%? GhostNWN 07:55, 23 June 2006 (PDT) :I'd say it's more than "loosely based". It's directly based on D&D. Even so, I like the Controversy section, because it's a common point of discussion about the game. -- Alec Usticke 08:24, 23 June 2006 (PDT) NWN is directly based on D&D, but the key word is "based". There never was a claim that NWN would completely match the D&D rules. I can see having a "comparison to PnP" section, but calling it a "controversy" seems a bit over the top. In addition: *Discipline is not broken. It's working as designed. *I have my doubts that discipline is "widely considered" to be bad. *I have my doubts that most of those who don't like discipline would rank it as being nearly as bad as, say, parry, which doesn't even work the way it's described. (i.e. is discipline really considered "one of the most"?) *The argument for discipline contains a rebuttal, but the argument against does not, making the section sound more like a biased editorial than an encyclopedia entry. This could be cleaned up into a nice comparison of NWN and PnP, but I really don't like the high level of subjectiveness in the current form. (I guess I find the current tone of these notes more controversial than their subject.) --The Krit 09:52, 23 June 2006 (PDT) :Shrug. I thought it was a good recap of an often debated topic. It's obviously discussing people's opinions, but I thought it covered both sides. -- Alec Usticke 10:11, 23 June 2006 (PDT) Perhaps something more like /Proposed? I've reworded some things to make them more objective, removed the generalizations I don't see the justification of, and provided counters to all the points, not just the ones from one side. --The Krit 11:20, 23 June 2006 (PDT) (Link updated. --The Krit 12:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)) :Nicely done. -- Alec Usticke 16:36, 23 June 2006 (PDT) *I like it too, just substituted it into the article. If you are all ok with that, you can delete the proposal page then. Good work Krit :) -- GhostNWN 16:58, 23 June 2006 (PDT) Argument Becouse skills are scores that varies between very low to very high scores it makes a bad contrast towards all the other feats and effect that do not have skills. So I think that none of the skills should be directly combat orientated nor too effective in combat. Skills should partially push the player into at least more indirect combat orientated strategies. Discipline skill just slightly too important for gameplay. It is most bad for variation. This problem should be solved if; 1. If there where combat skills that opposed the discipline skill. 2. If other "indirect combat" skills that could compete for the sake of variation. For example skills that modify feats someway. 3. If discipline somehow become more "indirect" than it is now.